The book sits within a broader wave of so‑called “dirty” and “vulgar” titles that officials are eager to pull from shelves, alongside an educational volume on sex education that mentions animal penis sizes and works of classic literature by authors such as Tennessee Williams and Maya Angelou.
“We’re coming for the books,” Texas Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick asserted at a press conference, aiming to project an arch, cartoon‑villain vibe. Last week, he stood beside conservative activist Bonnie Wallace to challenge what he termed “dirty, filthy, and vulgar books”—and Wallace labeled the material “demonic content”—in school libraries.
Also in today’s briefing: Meta reaches a $16.68 billion settlement, Dolly Parton’s Playboy interview, anti-phone marketing efforts, inquiries into government hacking, and more.
‘Demonic’ Sex Education Content?
The material at issue in Texas is…a sex education book directed at high school readers. Let’s Talk About It: The Teen’s Guide to Sex, Relationships, and Being a Human was the main target highlighted by Patrick and Wallace. And from their hype, one might assume the 2021 title—authored by Erika Moen and Matthew Nolan, a married couple—featured explicit pornography, possibly alongside guidance on gangbangs and instructions for crafting Satan‑shaped sex toys.
Yet, from what appears, it reads as a fairly standard, age‑appropriate sex education resource. The publisher states it is intended for audiences ages 14 and up. It presents topics like consent, boundary setting, handling rejection, contraception, and preventing sexually transmitted diseases in a conversational, comic‑book style. It includes messages such as “It’s okay to skip sexual activities if they don’t interest you” and “you should never have sex if you know it isn’t right for you.”
You are reading Sex & Tech, from Elizabeth Nolan Brown. Get more of Elizabeth’s sex, tech, bodily autonomy, law, and online culture coverage.
There are a handful of pages showing explicit (cartoon) depictions of nude bodies, but these aren’t meant to be erotic. Some appear in a chapter about body image dealing with insecurity and the importance of not constantly comparing yourself to others. Others show up in a biology lesson about hormones, genitals, and sex characteristics.
There are mentions of topics such as polyamory, sex toys, masturbation, porn, and sexting. Still, they aren’t presented in gratuitous or overly graphic ways. They’re framed as part of an educational discussion, even though some people in Texas seem to think teens—and perhaps adult women—don’t need to know about these subjects.
“These are books that are so disgusting, so filthy, so dirty, so vulgar, so pornographic that for the ladies here, I wouldn’t even open it and show you,” Patrick remarked. “I didn’t show the female senators last session…We passed [Senate Bill 13], but I did it without.”
It’s unusual for men in power to imply that their female colleagues are like children, but that is where we find ourselves.
Sex censorship has always rested on a patriarchal notion of “protection” of children and women (whom some still treat as if they were children). Picture telling a room full of colleagues—fellow lawmakers, reporters— that they must be shielded from ordinary discussions of sex in a book meant for readers aged 14 and up.
— Mike Stabile (@mikestabile.bsky.social) 2026-08-19T23:32:16.663Z
The bill Patrick mentioned, which was approved last year, grants parents greater power to challenge specific titles and gives school boards the final say on library shelves.
Patrick “also indicated that lawmakers will file a measure next session to compel the Texas Education Agency to lower a school’s accountability grade if it houses any copies of a challenged book,” according to KXAN.
“We’re not banning books,” Patrick stressed at the press briefing. “You may buy any book you want, and many are accessible through public libraries.”
Fair enough—though one could doubt that Patrick and allies wouldn’t push to ban certain works if the First Amendment allowed it. Yet keeping a book off a school shelf doesn’t require a formal ban to raise concerns.
In this instance, the state’s lieutenant governor is pressing schools to remove particular titles and advocating legislation that ties school ratings to adherence. That’s a far cry from librarians or school boards choosing not to stock certain books on their own premises. It’s not a full ban, but it is a heavy‑handed tactic that could push a wide range of volumes out of reach for many students who rely on school libraries or public libraries (where funding or bullying pressures could also prompt removal).
It also squeezes room for local decision‑making about what is appropriate. Patrick even criticized some districts for resisting pressure to pull specific books from libraries.
I understand why titles like Let’s Talk About It may unsettle some readers. (I admit I blushed at a few passages.) But if we don’t want teenagers to learn about sexuality chiefly from online porn, then books like this—frankly addressing a broad spectrum of relationship and sexuality topics—could be valuable.
What’s evident to me is that for Texas authorities the issue isn’t whether the book is obscene or pornographic, but that it discusses sex and masturbation with teens at all. It’s hard to ignore that the presence of same‑sex couples and phrases like “gender is bigger than just male or female” may also irritate some observers.
At the press conference, Patrick’s office handed out copies of Let’s Talk About It with five pages flagged. According to KXAN, these included:
- A disclaimer advising readers to consult a medical professional for health information.
- Two pages about sex toys (one noting their existence; the other warning that inserting objects without a flared base into an anus can lead to a hospital visit).
- Two pages discussing pornography (noting it may be illegal to view depending on age or region, and that it can be unrealistic or unethical).
Patrick also criticized a book about animal reproduction, Do Animals Fall In Love?, for “measur[ing] the penis size of over 80 animals.”
Patrick’s catalog of what he calls “filthy,” “dirty,” and “vulgar” texts totals nearly 2,200 titles, which he wants removed from public‑school shelves. “The list is heavily centered on LGBTQ+ topics, issues of gender identity, sex education, body awareness, and romance,” KHOU notes.
Among the titles are a mix of contemporary YA works like The Perks of Being a Wallflower and The Fault In Our Stars, along with timeless staples such as The Glass Menagerie by Tennessee Williams, Flowers for Algernon by Daniel Keyes, The Bluest Eye by Toni Morrison, The Picture of Dorian Gray by Oscar Wilde, and I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings by Maya Angelou. Other items on the list include Ab(solutely) Normal: Short Stories That Smash Mental Health Stereotypes, Anne Frank’s Diary: The Graphic Adaptation, Better Than We Found It: Conversations to Help Save the World, Launching Our Black Children for Success, We Need To Talk About Vaginas, and LGBTQ Human Rights Movement.
In the News
Meta settles for $16.68 billion. While I was drafting this briefing, reports surfaced that Meta reached a settlement with states accusing the company of engineering platforms like Facebook and Instagram to foster addiction among young users. From Reuters:
The settlement resolves claims brought by 29 U.S. states, and will end a federal trial that had become one of the highest‑profile tests to date of allegations that social media companies harmed young users.
Meta will impose daily usage limits and restrict nighttime access for under‑18s on Facebook and Instagram, and strengthen safeguards to block access to age‑restricted content.
The Menlo Park‑based company denied wrongdoing in agreeing to settle.
I understand why they chose this path, but…ugh. It feels like it could simply empower state authorities to claim victory and spur more lawsuits that try to bypass constitutional protections by characterizing issues with social platforms as “product design” rather than speech.
Government hackers: Some senators want clarity on how often federal law‑enforcement agencies hack Americans’ phones. From Politico:
Sen. RON WYDEN (D‑Ore.) and Rep. GREG CASAR (D‑Texas) have asked GAO to examine how federal agencies use spyware to access the mobile devices of U.S. residents, particularly agencies within Homeland Security and Justice.
GAO spokesperson Sarah Kaczmarek said Friday that the agency has received the congressional requests and is evaluating how to proceed.
Their letter notes:
While federal law‑enforcement bodies have used hacking and spyware as investigative tools for more than a quarter‑century, public information about the scope, frequency, or safeguards is sparse. Unlike traditional surveillance authorities, there are no annual reports detailing hacking operations. Although the DOJ and DHS have public policies on tools like cell‑site simulators (“Stingrays”), there are no comparable public policies for federal hacking. Moreover, the DOJ and the FBI have repeatedly ignored congressional requests for greater transparency across multiple administrations.
On Substack
Could smartphones become obsolete? Kate Lindsay of the embedded newsletter notes a rise in “anti‑phone marketing,” with firms like Google and Apple steering people toward spreading screen time across several devices:
I revisited Apple’s June WWDC presentation; while they didn’t explicitly label it anti‑phone, they described their product ecosystem as a “common foundation of technologies.” In other words: No phone? No problem. Wear our smartwatch, strap on our smart glasses, and watch us blend into your daily routine. It’s exactly what Embedded predicted a year ago after the introduction of Liquid Glass: Scrolling is over.
Seen through this lens, the demise of the single social feed and the shift to a multi‑device approach hints at a future where technology follows you around your world, feeding into a tailored digital ecosystem—your personal digital realities.
Viewed this way, my phone could become a relic—a clunky artifact that future generations might only own as a nostalgic curiosity or as a reminder of older tech we’ve left behind.
Will that come to pass? I’m curious to hear what readers of Sex & Tech think.
Read This Thread
Pushback against blaming ChatGPT for suicide:
Really frustrating coverage of a woman who died by suicide, attributing too much to ChatGPT. There’s a lot missing here, and some obvious factors the piece didn’t mention.
For example, seeking therapy for suicidal thoughts can lead to recommended escalation of care, not just a quick fix. pic.twitter.com/EPPeClqmHN
— Shoshana Weissmann, Sloth Committee Chair 🦥 (@senatorshoshana) August 25, 2026
More Sex & Tech News
- “And I mean, who else but Dolly Parton should be on the cover of Playboy? If you wanted an outrageous person to be an outrageous magazine cover, who else? I just hope people will take it in the spirit in which I did it—you know, something cute and off‑the‑wall for me.” Read the full 1978 Dolly Parton (RIP) interview with Playboy here.
• Partying against moral panic:
Wow okay this really blew up! It was originally planned as a house party in my 900 sq ft. Shaw rowhome, but now I need a bigger space. Anyone interested in sponsoring or hosting a venue in DC? https://t.co/VIv4xjqxcU
— Jonas Du (@JonasYDu) August 25, 2026
• I spoke with Andrew Langer of Washington Signal’s Lunch Hour podcast about tech regulation—and how it always seems to begin with sex:
Can laws meant to curb online harm also threaten privacy and free speech?
On this episode of the Lunch Hour Podcast, host @Andrew_Langer sits down with @ENBrown, our senior editor at @reason, to discuss the growing debate over government regulation of online speech… pic.twitter.com/qvtIkjbjCR
— Lunch Hour Podcast (@TheLunchHourPod) August 24, 2026
• Maxine Doogan outlines the risks of California’s Assembly Bill 2001, which is pitched as a narrow procedural change but could be used to seize assets from sex workers and others without due process.
• Isabelle Fox on decriminalizing sex work: “More government involvement doesn’t automatically improve conditions. What matters is whether providers and women retain real autonomy.”
Vegas‑related. Sex work should be decriminalized, not legalized. pic.twitter.com/sLqYIxulDg
— Vital Vegas (@VitalVegas) August 24, 2026
• An increasing number of experts warn against blanket blocks on teens’ access to social media, notes Mike Masnick. “This matters, because for the last year or so it’s felt almost inevitable that social media bans would become the global default—despite the science not supporting them and despite nobody having solid evidence about what such bans would do to kids.”
• And now you know:
You learn something new every day!
— Steve Carlson (@lcosgrove.bsky.social) 2026-08-20T20:45:09.606Z
